From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 23 02:56:32 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03DC106564A; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:56:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9572C8FC0A; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:56:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iadj38 with SMTP id j38so16048658iad.13 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 18:56:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date:to; bh=C7U0E5PPsXEkzu6WcR6qQiAumZ0/fligcBBPx+q5vbI=; b=Y9k2MSZvPbLQDnA/bCDeEwk1xJG5A4DfHyTUGCHHLgYw1KT1hjcVBQinR8OBDvF1s2 QUK7mVuhaELk+i1bB5xR4/Fuo/oo0cVZ7GalqLM9pgb9c8O7nL8JJBOIeufhjqY2Pg5d Lc332WMvE8mayCPh3fwMSUx34dj3XjoYxZ9qU= Received: by 10.50.170.35 with SMTP id aj3mr11595295igc.2.1324608991063; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 18:56:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.75.41.133] (mobile-166-205-136-165.mycingular.net. [166.205.136.165]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gf6sm38973155igb.1.2011.12.22.18.56.25 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 22 Dec 2011 18:56:30 -0800 (PST) References: <4EF3C0CE.5040802@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20111222235846.GA6071@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <20111222235846.GA6071@icarus.home.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: <9706CBFC-9A69-4365-8883-FF45BDFDC108@gmail.com> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9A405) From: Garrett Cooper Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 18:56:17 -0800 To: Jeremy Chadwick Cc: "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" , "igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk" , Alexander Leidinger , "freebsd-performance@freebsd.org" , "O. Hartmann" Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:56:32 -0000 On Dec 22, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrot= e: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:44:14AM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: >> On 12/21/11 19:41, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>> Hi, >>>=20 >>> while the discussion continued here, some work started at some other pla= ce. Now... in case someone here is willing to help instead of talking, feel f= ree to go to http://wiki.freebsd.org/BenchmarkAdvice and have a look what ca= n be improved. The page is far from perfect and needs some additional people= which are willing to improve it. >>>=20 >>> This is only part of the problem. A tuning page in the wiki - which coul= d be referenced from the benchmark page - would be great too. Any volunteers= ? A first step would be to take he tuning-man-page and wikify it. Other tuni= ng sources are welcome too. >>>=20 >>> Every FreeBSD dev with a wiki account can hand out write access to the w= iki. The benchmark page gives contributor-access. If someone wants write acc= ess create a FirstnameLastname account and ask here for contributor-access. >>>=20 >>> Don't worry if you think your english is not good enough, even some one-= word notes can help (and _my_ english got already corrected by other people o= n the benchmark page). >>>=20 >>> Bye, >>> Alexander. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >> Nice to see movement ;-) >>=20 >> But there seems something unclear: >>=20 >> man make.conf(5) says, that MALLOC_PRODUCTION is a knob set in >> /etc/make.conf. >> The WiJi says, MALLOC_PRODUCTION is to be set in /etc/src.conf. >>=20 >> What's right and what's wrong now? >=20 > I can say with certainty that this value belongs in /etc/make.conf > (on RELENG_8 and earlier at least). >=20 > src/share/mk/bsd.own.mk has no framework for MK_MALLOC_PRODUCTION, > so, this is definitely a make.conf variable. Take the advice in tuning(7) with a grain of salt because a number of sugges= tions are really outdated. I know because I filed a PR last night after I sa= w how out of synch some of the defaults it claimed were with reality on 9.x+= . And I know other suggestions in the manpage are dated as well ;/. Thanks, -Garrett=